MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

E-099 Does Anterior Cerebral Artery Vasospasm after Spontaneous Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Predict Short Term Cognitive Outcome

2016· article· en· W2570465985 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vijay Pandav, Bradley N. Bohnstedt, Lori K. Yearout, David M. Thompson, Bappaditya Ray

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSubarachnoid hemorrhageMontreal Cognitive AssessmentVasospasmCardiologyAnesthesiaCerebral vasospasmMiddle cerebral arteryInternal medicineTranscranial DopplerIschemiaDementia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Spontaneous subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) is a disabling form of hemorrhagic stroke that affects young individuals and is responsible for short-term and long-term cognitive deficits. Delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) is postulated to be the major determinant for this morbidity. Cerebral vasospasm (CVS) is a major contributor of DCI. Treatment of symptomatic CVS can consist of intra-arterial vasodilators or angioplasty. This study reports preliminary data on cognitive outcomes in a prospective cohort of patients with spontaneous SAH who received vasodilator therapy for anterior cerebral artery (ACA) vasospasm. Aim 1. Determine role of delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) and CVS after spontaneous SAH on short-term cognitive outcome. 2. Determine if ACA vasospasm predicts short-term cognitive outcome. 3. Determine if treatment of ACA vasospasm results in improvement in short-term cognitive outcome. Methods Thirty-five patients with clinical follow-up at 3 months after SAH were selected from a prospective cohort. DCI was defined as a new hypodensity on CT scans located in a vascular territory, with or without symptoms (decrease of consciousness or focal deficits), due to CVS and not explained by other causes (e.g. rebleeding, hydrocephalus, cardioembolic sources, hypoxia, electrolyte disturbances, or seizures). CVS was defined as ≥25% narrowing on digital subtraction angiogram (aCVS) or Transcranial Doppler mean flow velocity ≥120 cm/sec (sCVS). Cognitive outcomes were assessed using Montreal Cognitive Outcome Assessment (MOCA) and poor cognitive outcome was defined as MOCA score <26. Fisher’s exact tests and logistic regression were performed to analyze the study questions. Results Average age of the study cohort was 53.1 ± 11.5 years with 71% of the patients being women. DCI occurred in 16/35 (45.7%) patients. In the absence of sCVS, DCI predicted poor cognitive outcomes (3/5 with DCI, 60% vs 1/10 without DCI, 10%; p = 0.04). Patients with anterior cerebral artery or anterior communicating complex (ACA/ACom) related aneurysmal SAH were less likely to have MOCA < 26 (ACA/ACom vs others (3/12, 25% vs 11/23, 47.8%; p = 0.28). Of the 22 patients who underwent digital subtraction angiogram for clinical indication, 10 were found to have ACA CVS and were treated. Patients with SAH due to ACA/ACom location aneurysms displayed low MOCA scores less often than those with SAH in other locations (2/5; 40% vs 4/5; 80%; p = 0.15). A two-factor logistic regression model found that, while holding treatment status constant, the odds of a poor cognitive outcome were 4.6 times higher (90% CI on odds ratio: 1.0, 21.3; p = 0.0998) among those with SAH outside of ACA/ACom aneurysms. Conclusions Our study reaffirms that occurrence of DCI after SAH predicts poor cognitive outcome at 3 months. The fact that cognitive outcomes were not superior in patients treated for CVS suggests that a complex pathophysiology determines outcomes after SAH. Relatively poor cognitive outcome among patients with SAH in locations other than ACA/ACom alludes to involvement of functional neural network apart from frontal lobe based networks that needs further investigation. Disclosures V. Pandav: None. B. Bohnstedt: None. L. Yearout: None. D. Thompson: None. B. Ray: None.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.238 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIntracranial Aneurysms: Treatment and Complications→French-language works237,207→